original shia part 2

[ravage]

Re: original shia part 2

regarding purity equating to infallibility, the arabic is utahhirukum minal rijas which means purify you from sin, which is roughly what I mean by infallibility.

secondly you are finding less holes in the sunni version because it is written as such. as i said, the site is famous for its revisionist interpretation of history. I can cite you a number of much much more accredited and established and earlier sunni accounts of history that mention ghadeer as it is mentioned on the shia site. infact the only reason why i posted the shia site wasnt that you get the whole shia treatment but that you click on the links posted there about sunni books where this event is narrated exactly as described in shia versions of history. the sex slave thing is not found in the shia version of history, but do you know the time at which all these books were written? Ameer Muawiya, who waged a war against Ali was the one under who’s time the most ahadiths were collated, do you know that its established fact that he ordered the abuse of Ali from the pulpits. I can cite a sahih hadees to support that.

do you find it hard to believe under those circumstances that history books would tell a slightly diiferent picture?

now as for you sticking to the Quran because shias might bring ahadith you might have difficulty believing because they’re shia ahadith, i repeat: I have not brought a single hadees that hasnt been vetted extensively by sunni scholars and has been determined to be have such a degree and chain of transimission as to be deemed authentic. they’re all sahih ahadith.

And then the MOST confusing question of all - Why is it that if it was as obvious as your Shia website says - that EVERYONE knew that Ali was being coronated, then why were there so soooooo many people who sided with Abu Bakr. Even Aisha, the Prophet’s own wife, then rejected a command from God Himself? That kinda doesn’t make any sense.

whos to say how many people sided with abu bakr? I posted some time ago about that book, succession to muhammad. Its by a non Muslim, emeritus professor of islamic history from Oxford, you have to understand the magnitude of the politics that was going on in order to see why there was so much strife after the Prophet’s death.

i want you to go and look into history books, and see where Ali was at the time of Abu Bakr’s selection. And what time the selection happened. And when Ali gave Abu Bakr his bayet.

lastly regarding your last post and saying that imams not resembling abrahimic prophets. firstly, its fact that the most prophets came from banu israel and within them the most prophets from a specific family tree in banu israel which continued till the Prophet and in our belief to our imams.

secondly, there have been imams outside of Ali’s progeny, Hazrat Ibrahim was an imam. thirdly all of Ali’s direct progeny or even eldest progeny were not deemed imams.

lastly heres more supporting evidence of twelve imams from sahih bukhari:

heard the Prophet saying, “There will be twelve Muslim rulers (who will rule all the Islamic world).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, “All of them (those rulers) will be from Quraish.”

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/089.sbt.html#009.089.329

if you believe they were other 12 other leaders from the Quraysh who were considered leaders of Islam, please cite them.

finally for the person who asked me to show him where the hadees is about qureish keep ing khilafat, heres one from sahih bukhari:

Allah’s Apostle said, “This matter (caliphate) will remain with the Quraish even if only two of them were still existing.”

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/089.sbt.html#009.089.254